hi martijn,
I don't do that. I pose that it is very easy to say that feature X must be implemented when you don't have to do anything yourself in supporting feature X.
i don't want a new feature. the point is wicket's implementation of transparent resolvers has it's troubles making it hard to use it to implement extension to (default) components (due to encapsulation).
all i ask is to get a workaround until there might be a new implementation of how transparent resolvers work.
It is a matter of fact: should we support this or not.
as i said, it's not a question of to support it, it's a matter of 'we can't fix it atm, but there's a way we could fix a problem for now'...
regards, --- jan. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
